Digest Number 987

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for Your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at Myinks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada. http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/l.m7sD/LId...sNAA/IMSolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are 11 messages in this issue.

Topics in this digest:

1. Spawnings for skink priests
From: "Hammer of Ulric" <rogerdavid2002@aol.com>
2. Re: Spawnings for skink priests
From: "Mr. Green" <mach_5@rocketmail.com>
3. Re: Item and Option interaction
From: Colen McAlister <colen@wolflair.com>
4. Imperial Guard
From: Jan-Philipp Trommershäuser <Illuminati01_@hotmail.com>
5. Re: Item and Option interaction
From: "teatimeau" <Teatime@portentmail.com>
6. RE: Imperial Guard
From: Randel Clawson <Randel.Clawson@CTBTO.org>
7. Re: Item and Option interaction
From: "teatimeau" <Teatime@portentmail.com>
8. Re: Item and Option interaction
From: trent <felix@medford.net>
9. Composition syntax
From: "teatimeau" <Teatime@portentmail.com>
10. Re: Composition syntax
From: "Mr. Green" <mach_5@rocketmail.com>
11. Re: Composition syntax
From: Colen McAlister <colen@wolflair.com>


__________________________________________________ ______________________
__________________________________________________ ______________________

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 17:38:01 -0000
From: "Hammer of Ulric" <rogerdavid2002@aol.com>
Subject: Spawnings for skink priests

Hi

I'm a n00b to AB, but I think I have a problem with the Warhammer
Fantasy files.

I can't see how to add spawnings to skink characters.

Am I missing it, or hasn't it been implemented?

Hammer of Ulric



__________________________________________________ ______________________
__________________________________________________ ______________________

Message: 2
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 10:48:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Mr. Green" <mach_5@rocketmail.com>
Subject: Re: Spawnings for skink priests

Skinks have an option in their options list that says "<> Spawning".
Click the arrows to the right/left until you have selected the spawning
you want. Leaving at 'Spawning' means you have not given them a spawning.
Note they can only take the spawning of Sotek and the Mark of the Old
Ones.

Feel free to forward all future questions/bug reports regarding the
Warhammer datafiles directly to me at mach_5@rocketmail.com.

Cheers,
Mark

--- Hammer of Ulric <rogerdavid2002@aol.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> I'm a n00b to AB, but I think I have a problem with the Warhammer
> Fantasy files.
>
> I can't see how to add spawnings to skink characters.
>
> Am I missing it, or hasn't it been implemented?
>
> Hammer of Ulric
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, email
>
> armybuilder-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>


=====
WF6 Army Builder File Manager
Direwolf FAQ Council - Army Builder Liaison
-
Warhammer Club - Vancouver, BC
http://www.WCP-Vancouver.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com


__________________________________________________ ______________________
__________________________________________________ ______________________

Message: 3
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 02:00:48 -0700
From: Colen McAlister <colen@wolflair.com>
Subject: Re: Item and Option interaction

At 11:43 AM 9/3/2003 +0000, you wrote:

>General expression of the problem: I am working on a new datafile for
>an existing system. I have both Options and Items that modify stats
>through the base: and stat: options respectively. In order to remain
>faithful to the mechanics of the game system the stat modifications
>activated by the Options really need to be evaluated before the
>modifications made by the Item. Unfortunately I find that the Item
>always takes priority and the resulting stat is miscalculated.
>
>Questions:
>1. Is there a way of having an Item activate an Option? If there were
>I could hide an option with the appropriate priority and have it do
>the stat modification instead.

There is indeed. Give every unit that can take the item an option linked
with 'auto', so it's automatically included, that hides itself and depends
on a type to activate. So the attributes of such an option would look like:

hide
utyp:SomeType
stat:X+14

(You can either use the glob:auto attribute to assign the option to all
units, or manually assign it, or use inheritance (the 'clon' unit local
attribute), or something similar.) Then have the item assign the type
'SomeType'. When the type SomeType is assigned, the option takes effect.

>2. Is there a way of changing the priority of an Item so that it is
>evaluated after an Option? I tried a ipri: and going through a Tweak
>to no effect. I wouldn't want the Item evaluated after ALL Options,
>as there are some where it is appropriate to calculate it first.

I'm afraid not. All items are processed before all options.


--
Colen McAlister (colen@wolflair.com)
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com




__________________________________________________ ______________________
__________________________________________________ ______________________

Message: 4
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 07:24:53 +0200
From: Jan-Philipp Trommershäuser <Illuminati01_@hotmail.com>
Subject: Imperial Guard

Hi,
Im looking for a file of the new 40k Imperial Guard Codex!
If it exists
Can someone send it to me??


----- Original Message -----
From: teatimeau
To: armybuilder@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 1:43 PM
Subject: [AB] Item and Option interaction


Hi all,

Another newbie for the mill! Hopefully that means my queries are
simple to answer...

General expression of the problem: I am working on a new datafile for
an existing system. I have both Options and Items that modify stats
through the base: and stat: options respectively. In order to remain
faithful to the mechanics of the game system the stat modifications
activated by the Options really need to be evaluated before the
modifications made by the Item. Unfortunately I find that the Item
always takes priority and the resulting stat is miscalculated.

Questions:
1. Is there a way of having an Item activate an Option? If there were
I could hide an option with the appropriate priority and have it do
the stat modification instead.

2. Is there a way of changing the priority of an Item so that it is
evaluated after an Option? I tried a ipri: and going through a Tweak
to no effect. I wouldn't want the Item evaluated after ALL Options,
as there are some where it is appropriate to calculate it first.

3. Is there some other solution to my problem? I am a newbie after
all. It would be ugly to change the Item to an Option instead, since
it wouldn't match all the others of its type. I'd prefer not to have
an option that must be activated manually by the user after they've
bought the item.

Background to the problem: I've input a new warband for Mordheim, the
Norse Reavers. The Frenzy ability doesn't calculate Attacks properly
generally (order should be stat mods, then *2 for frenzy, then add
weapons) but I've fixed that by creating my own set of Attack
increase options with a higher priority and then a frenzy option that
lies between the stat increase and the weapon options. This works
fine for units that start with frenzy, the problem comes when other
units buy a Skill that allows them frenzy.

Thanks for any asistance!

Cheers,
Teatime



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT




To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



__________________________________________________ ______________________
__________________________________________________ ______________________

Message: 5
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 08:38:52 -0000
From: "teatimeau" <Teatime@portentmail.com>
Subject: Re: Item and Option interaction

--- In armybuilder@yahoogroups.com, "Mr. Green" <mach_5@r...> wrote:
>
> > 3. Is there some other solution to my problem? I am a newbie
after
> > all. It would be ugly to change the Item to an Option instead,
since
> > it wouldn't match all the others of its type. I'd prefer not to
have
> > an option that must be activated manually by the user after
they've
> > bought the item.
>
> I think your best 'option' would be to use both an option and an
item to
> represent items that give the bearer frenzy rather than trying to
fit the
> item directly into the order of options (I'm not sure if that's even
> possible). Basically, you will create your item as normal, and
give it a
> type describing it, ie the attribute 'type:frenzy' or some such.
>
> Next, create an option at the appropriate priority level and give
it the
> 'glob:incl' and 'utyp:frenzy' attributes and also have it modify the
> attacks stat *2 or whatever you require.
>
> Hope this helps!
>
> Mark

Yep, that's exactly what I needed. I'd tried this route before using
the olgl: attribute, but of course the option wasn't getting added to
units because they didn't possess the correct type at creation. I'd
also made the assumption that utyp: would only reveal an existing
option without activating it, much like the show: attribute - glad to
see I was wrong on that one.

Thanks for the help!

Cheers,
Teatime



__________________________________________________ ______________________
__________________________________________________ ______________________

Message: 6
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 11:36:03 +0200
From: Randel Clawson <Randel.Clawson@CTBTO.org>
Subject: RE: Imperial Guard

Jan-Philipp Trommershäuser wrote:
> Im looking for a file of the new 40k Imperial Guard Codex!
> If it exists
> Can someone send it to me??

Jan-Philipp, you should re-read the text of the message you
received when you joined this group:

"Welcome to the Army Builder support and discussion group.
This group is NOT for posting of Army Builder files - the
ab-files@yahoogroups.com group is for that. This group is
run by Colen McAlister, demandred@skrill.org, and Rob Bowes,
rob@wolflair.com."

"Note that the Warhammer 40,000 (3rd Edition) files should not
be discussed here - use this list instead:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ab-40k3"

So, as you can see you should join the ab-40k3 group to find
that data file.

Cheers,
Randel


__________________________________________________ ______________________
__________________________________________________ ______________________

Message: 7
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 13:21:28 -0000
From: "teatimeau" <Teatime@portentmail.com>
Subject: Re: Item and Option interaction

--- In armybuilder@yahoogroups.com, Colen McAlister <colen@w...>
wrote:

> There is indeed. Give every unit that can take the item an option
linked
> with 'auto', so it's automatically included, that hides itself and
depends
> on a type to activate. So the attributes of such an option would
look like:
>
> hide
> utyp:SomeType
> stat:X+14
>
> (You can either use the glob:auto attribute to assign the option to
all
> units, or manually assign it, or use inheritance (the 'clon' unit
local
> attribute), or something similar.) Then have the item assign the
type
> 'SomeType'. When the type SomeType is assigned, the option takes
effect.

Mr. Green was a little quicker on the trigger, but thanks for the
reply I did indeed tackle the problem this way with the desired
result. If you're interested in feedback concerning ABCreator: it
wasn't clear to me from the description of the utyp: attribute that a
previously un-linked option could be enabled at run-time, nor that
the desired option would also turn up in the selected state. I am
willing to entertain the idea that perhaps I was being a bit thick,
and should have just tried it anyway

> >2. Is there a way of changing the priority of an Item so that it is
> >evaluated after an Option? I tried a ipri: and going through a
Tweak
> >to no effect. I wouldn't want the Item evaluated after ALL Options,
> >as there are some where it is appropriate to calculate it first.
>
> I'm afraid not. All items are processed before all options.

Roger, thanks.

>
> --
> Colen McAlister (colen@w...)
> Lone Wolf Development
www.wolflair.com

Cheers,
Teatime




__________________________________________________ ______________________
__________________________________________________ ______________________

Message: 8
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 06:45:35 -0700
From: trent <felix@medford.net>
Subject: Re: Item and Option interaction

At 08:38 AM 9/4/2003 +0000, you wrote:
>--- In armybuilder@yahoogroups.com, "Mr. Green" <mach_5@r...> wrote:
> >
> > > 3. Is there some other solution to my problem? I am a newbie
>after
> > > all. It would be ugly to change the Item to an Option instead,
>since
> > > it wouldn't match all the others of its type. I'd prefer not to
>have
> > > an option that must be activated manually by the user after
>they've
> > > bought the item.
> >
> > I think your best 'option' would be to use both an option and an
>item to
> > represent items that give the bearer frenzy rather than trying to
>fit the
> > item directly into the order of options (I'm not sure if that's even
> > possible). Basically, you will create your item as normal, and
>give it a
> > type describing it, ie the attribute 'type:frenzy' or some such.
> >
> > Next, create an option at the appropriate priority level and give
>it the
> > 'glob:incl' and 'utyp:frenzy' attributes and also have it modify the
> > attacks stat *2 or whatever you require.
> >
> > Hope this helps!
> >
> > Mark
>
>Yep, that's exactly what I needed. I'd tried this route before using
>the olgl: attribute, but of course the option wasn't getting added to
>units because they didn't possess the correct type at creation. I'd
>also made the assumption that utyp: would only reveal an existing
>option without activating it, much like the show: attribute - glad to
>see I was wrong on that one.
>
>Thanks for the help!
>
>Cheers,
>Teatime
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, email
>
>armybuilder-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




__________________________________________________ ______________________
__________________________________________________ ______________________

Message: 9
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 13:35:15 -0000
From: "teatimeau" <Teatime@portentmail.com>
Subject: Composition syntax

This question isn't specifically related to the .wf6 files, but it is
where I found the example that's confusing me...

The cr.wf6 contains an Race Augmentation record for all races (xx)
with the following Attribute:

xbrk:"WH Skirmish"="Hero@?,Core@?,Spec@?,Rare@?"-mode=zz

The syntax for the composition rule doesn't seem to match what's
required (ie <set>=<group>:<rule>,...) but it works like a charm,
removing all limits on composition for the named groups. Can someone
point me to where this particular syntax is explained?

Cheers,
Teatime



__________________________________________________ ______________________
__________________________________________________ ______________________

Message: 10
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 08:49:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Mr. Green" <mach_5@rocketmail.com>
Subject: Re: Composition syntax

I can't actually tell you where it comes from... as you said it doesn't
fit what the ConstKit.rtf says. I simply copied the syntax from the
Warmaster files (which uses it exlusively from what I've seen). Perhaps
it's from an older version of AB and is no longer documented but still
exists for backward compatibility?

Cheers,
Mark

--- teatimeau <Teatime@portentmail.com> wrote:
> This question isn't specifically related to the .wf6 files, but it is
> where I found the example that's confusing me...
>
> The cr.wf6 contains an Race Augmentation record for all races (xx)
> with the following Attribute:
>
> xbrk:"WH Skirmish"="Hero@?,Core@?,Spec@?,Rare@?"-mode=zz
>
> The syntax for the composition rule doesn't seem to match what's
> required (ie <set>=<group>:<rule>,...) but it works like a charm,
> removing all limits on composition for the named groups. Can someone
> point me to where this particular syntax is explained?
>
> Cheers,
> Teatime
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, email
>
> armybuilder-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>


=====
WF6 Army Builder File Manager
Direwolf FAQ Council - Army Builder Liaison
-
Warhammer Club - Vancouver, BC
http://www.WCP-Vancouver.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com


__________________________________________________ ______________________
__________________________________________________ ______________________

Message: 11
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 09:50:19 -0700
From: Colen McAlister <colen@wolflair.com>
Subject: Re: Composition syntax

At 01:35 PM 9/4/2003 +0000, you wrote:
>This question isn't specifically related to the .wf6 files, but it is
>where I found the example that's confusing me...
>
>The cr.wf6 contains an Race Augmentation record for all races (xx)
>with the following Attribute:
>
>xbrk:"WH Skirmish"="Hero@?,Core@?,Spec@?,Rare@?"-mode=zz
>
>The syntax for the composition rule doesn't seem to match what's
>required (ie <set>=<group>:<rule>,...) but it works like a charm,
>removing all limits on composition for the named groups. Can someone
>point me to where this particular syntax is explained?

As Mr Green suggested, this is an old syntax (pre- Army Builder 2) that's
still supported for backwards compatibility. IIRC, '@?' is the equivalent
of the current ':any'.


--
Colen McAlister (colen@wolflair.com)
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com




__________________________________________________ ______________________
__________________________________________________ ______________________



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/